Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

To be fair, the central power of privilege also brings about it with being blamed for everything, and how certain groups seem to think that those in power cannot be discriminated against.

Being blamed for anything by marginalized, disempowered people amounts to nothing but a faint noise that is easily ignored. It cannot be ignored to the extent that said people become less marginalized and disempowered.

 Manchu wrote:
Being blamed for anything by marginalized, disempowered people amounts to nothing but a faint noise that is easily ignored. It cannot be ignored to the extent that said people become less marginalized and disempowered.

Can you repeat that in some different words?

I think I understand what you're saying, but for some reason I might be reading it wrong, and I want to make sure before I comment on it.

 rockerbikie wrote:
People such as Amazingatheist have made arguments against the feminist community with stats and a majority of feminists ignore it.

People like you have long since made gak up to try to demonize the feminist movement.

But that doesn't make your made-up gak suddenly stop being becoming nothing more than blatant lies.



And yes, I do mean the term "lie" here. You have been given numerous examples of feminists who argue that double standards hurt men as well. You have been given numerous examples of feminist ideals that would benefit men. But no, you ignore them-- and say "feminists are eeeeevil" because your entire argument can't stand on its own without that strawman to support it.

Hell it was the feminist movement that said "men don't always have to pay for dinner on a date; the woman can pay for it if she's better off, or hell, you can split it!". The feminist movement has also been among the bigger supporters of men getting paternal leave as well. Getting rid of double standards that devalue people because of their gender is the defining goal of the feminist movement. Where feminists vary, usually, is on how to enact said goal, and where to focus limited resources first.

I actually know a good handful of women who hate feminists for that.

I also know two or three who say they would rather not have a job, but "Thanks feminist movement!"

 Manchu wrote:
How could you respond in kind considering the amount of bad faith you have shown ITT? You have repeatedly demonstrated that you do not actually read (or at least understand) the posts that you are responding to or even the stuff you yourself post.

This is the second time you've made this claim ITT.

I'm really just reading along at this point to enjoy the thread, but you're pretty quick to equate a genuine ( at least in my case and perceived by me from dreadclaw) disagreement with "bad faith" and whatnot.

 Slarg232 wrote:

 Manchu wrote:
Being blamed for anything by marginalized, disempowered people amounts to nothing but a faint noise that is easily ignored. It cannot be ignored to the extent that said people become less marginalized and disempowered.

Can you repeat that in some different words?

The complaints of the powerless cannot hurt the powerful.

 Manchu wrote:

 Slarg232 wrote:

 Manchu wrote:
Being blamed for anything by marginalized, disempowered people amounts to nothing but a faint noise that is easily ignored. It cannot be ignored to the extent that said people become less marginalized and disempowered.

Can you repeat that in some different words?

The complaints of the powerless cannot hurt the powerful.

It can actually;

 Monster Rain wrote:
you're pretty quick to equate a genuine ( at least in my case and perceived by me from dreadclaw) disagreement with "bad faith" and whatnot.

The instant case is not of disagreement but of misrepresentation. I explained how the "be vocal" argument really works. Dreadclaw accused me of inconsistently advocating people speak up and remain silent. His misrepresentation became bad faith when he re-asserted it after I clarified.

 Slarg232 wrote:

 Manchu wrote:
The complaints of the powerless cannot hurt the powerful.

It can actually

What you are describing is the powerless becoming more powerful.

I think Jim Sterling hit the argument right on the head again.

http://www.escapistmagazine.com/videos/view/jimquisition/7044-The-Creepy-Cull-of-Female-Protagonists

 Manchu wrote:

 Slarg232 wrote:

 Manchu wrote:
The complaints of the powerless cannot hurt the powerful.

It can actually

What you are describing is the powerless becoming more powerful.

So why can't the powerless become more powerful here?

Women can learn to program and make games, can they not? Sure, there are fewer of them then men in the industry, but that can not, should not, and would not prevent them from grouping up and making strong women characters.

Again, there are plenty of strong female characters in games ( I listed several of them last page).

^ Woah, I thought Remember Me was a more adventureish type game, similar to Heavy Rain or something boring. Seeing gameplay of that, might haveto keep a closer eye on it.

Aaaaand it's made by Capcom..... Nevermind.

 Slarg232 wrote:
So why can't the powerless become more powerful here?

They can and are. That's why we're having this discussion. And that's why we're seeing the "be vocal" argument. It's a really desperate argument.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Fafnir wrote:
I think Jim Sterling hit the argument right on the head again.

http://www.escapistmagazine.com/videos/view/jimquisition/7044-The-Creepy-Cull-of-Female-Protagonists

I like how he makes it clear that the most important thing isn't finding out who to blame but just acknowledging there's something wrong in the first place.

 Fafnir wrote:
I think Jim Sterling hit the argument right on the head again.

http://www.escapistmagazine.com/videos/view/jimquisition/7044-The-Creepy-Cull-of-Female-Protagonists

Wow, I can't believe I never heard of Jim Sterling. That was a pretty good review of the topic.

 Manchu wrote:

 Slarg232 wrote:
So why can't the powerless become more powerful here?

They can and are. That's why we're having this discussion. And that's why we're seeing the "be vocal" argument. It's a really desperate argument.

Agreed, the industry really does need a change. That Jimquisition vid is really only part of the problem. I can really only think of one game where there was a black protagonist (Outland on XBLA).

Mind you, one at a time and all that.

That's a topic for another thread, but it certainly is a problem. Something like 90+ percent of game and non-"chick flick" movie protagonists are white anglo-saxon protestant males, and the ones that aren't get less and less marketing funding the further they deviate from this norm. And even in "chick flicks", most of the girls are white anglo-saxon protestant females anyway. There's a huge problem with Hollywood's weird idea of "beauty", leading them to only promote women that look eerily similar to each other.

Aren't there six stars that look like Katy Parry Clones running around now? I've lost track.

So Mel, since you're the only female (That I know of) in the thread, allow me to ask:

What makes a female character strong?

 Slarg232 wrote:
Aren't there six stars that look like Katy Parry Clones running around now? I've lost track.

So Mel, since you're the only female (That I know of) in the thread, allow me to ask:

What makes a female character strong?

Do you mean the distinction between "strong character, female" and "strong female, character"? Or something else?

Well, what makes Samus Aran a good female lead, but Bayonetta a mediocre one at best?

Or rather, so I'm not putting words in your mouth, on a scale of 1-10, how good are each of them as female protagonists?

 Slarg232 wrote:
Or rather, so I'm not putting words in your mouth, on a scale of 1-10, how good are each of them as female protagonists?

I haven't played Bayonetta, so I don't really want to rate the title character's characterization.

Fair enough, so I'll generalize the question a bit more;

What makes a "Strong Character, Female" (Which I'm going to assume is someone like Hammer from Fable II) over "Strong Female, Character", which is something like Samus (Pre-Other M, because let's face it, that was the biggest disgrace to a gaming icon since the Zelda Cartoon) or Kameo.

And correct me if I got those two mixed up.

Well, for the sake of Samus, she wasn't really given much of a character before Other M (thank god, apparently). But I would believe part of her "strong" qualities come from that. No real special depth went into investigating her status as a woman, she just was.

I don't consider her a great example, simply because she doesn't really have any characterization. But I can see why people think of her as a decent one.

I think one character worth discussing concerning strong female characters would be The Boss from MGS3. Easily one of the best characters, let alone female characters, that I have seen in a videogame. She's distinctly feminine, but not in a way that is patronizing or subversive to her character. It's just an aspect of her identity, but not the aspect.

 Slarg232 wrote:
What makes a "Strong Character, Female"

A female character who is well-rounded and interesting, instead of a flat, one-dimensional character intended for little more than fanservice.

Think about Oracle from the DC universe-- while sure she's a badass, she has a level of depth and personality, including both flaws and positive sides, that allows her to be interesting as a character, making people want to read about her, specifically, and what she is doing. Gail Simone's Birds of Prey series was quite good at giving all characters, male or female, a good level of depth.

 Slarg232 wrote:
"Strong Female, Character"

This merely indicates that the female character is a badass. The two are neither mutually inclusive nor exclusive. But yes, Samus Aran was not a "strong character", she was a blank slate. What made Metroid interesting was what she was capable of doing, the enemies she faced, and the setting. Not her personality, which was never displayed (no, Other M doesn't count) to the player anyway aside from her caring about the last Metroid in Super Metroid.

So Samus is a Strong Female, but not a Strong Character, much in the same way Master Cheif is a Strong Male, but not a Strong Character as well (Since I know you haven't played much Halo, he's pretty much the same thing, barely talks and when he does he uses like three words).

So as a base for reference, what video game characters would you say are Strong Character, Female?


Fafnir, I'm not ignoring you, but I have no experiance with The Boss, so can't comment :(

The blank slate thing about Samus is interesting because the male gamer just displaced all his agency into the character par usual. And then the mask came off and it turned out to be a woman who now had all this agency. It was a very parlor-trick kind of take on gender in video games. Later, before Other M, Samus had grown into her own character and remained very strong. Not to say she was extremely well developed but neither is Boba Fett. With Other M, she was suddenly portrayed as weepy, petulant, and sort of stupid.

You know, I wonder how that sort of parlor trick would work in the modern gaming community.

That depends on how much restraint the marketing division can show.

Scary thought, isn't it.

"Strong female characters" is sort of a weird turn of phrase, isn't it? I wouldn't place the bar very high at all - I'd say what's desirable are female characters who stand on their own rather than being defined by their relationship to someone. So, for instance, if you had a story where a character's identity was basically "love interest of hero X" then that would not be a strong character, but even if you flipped that around (so the female character is heroine X and the male character is love interest of heroine X) then that would be okay.

Also, keep in mind that "weak" characters existing isn't problematic in itself. Like any piece of culture, context is all-important.

HiveFleetPlastic wrote:
"Strong female characters" is sort of a weird turn of phrase, isn't it? I wouldn't place the bar very high at all - I'd say what's desirable are female characters who stand on their own rather than being defined by their relationship to someone.

I wouldn't deny that this is important for games.

You know, I booted up Kameo for the first time in years due to this thread, and found an old game idea I had where it WAS the male gets kidnapped (Right after proposing, no less) and she has to convince each of the Goddess' to assist her in avenging her fiance XD

Almost forgot this one in the stifling orthodoxy in permeating this thread: